To determine the presence of minute quantities of substances, such as alcohol, narcotics, drugs, or toxins in human body fluids, such as blood, several state-of-the-art methods have been utilized. Each of these methods have various disadvantages. Some methods involve obtaining a sample of body fluid, such as blood, which requires an invasive technique. There are public policy and legal problems associated with invasive techniques. When methods employing non-invasive techniques are used there are problems of inconvenience and/or inaccuracy. This is especially true in the determination of blood alcohol of persons suspected of being under the influence of intoxicating beverages. Some characteristic problems include contamination of the sample taken by substances not found in the body fluids, inaccuracy of the measurements, and subject resistance or non-cooperation. The present invention will eliminate many, if not all of the present problems encountered by forensic toxicologists and law enforcement officials associated with the in-field toxicity determinations especially as applied to so-called drunk driving or driving under the influence cases.
While law enforcement has in the past been primarily concerned with determining the presence and concentration of alcohol in the blood, the use by the public of other substances has led to the need to detect their presence. These substances include numerous narcotics, drugs, or their immediate precursors, all of which are referred to as "controlled substances." Such controlled substances or their products of decomposition include methadone, morphine, codeine, marijuana, amphetamines, barbiturates, and hallucinogenic substances. A complete schedule of such substances is specified in Sections 11034 through 11038 of the California Health and Safety Code.
Not only has there been an increase in the substances used but the wide variation in types of substances has made detection difficult. For example, non-invasive breath analysis is totally ineffective in detecting the presence of a large number of the diversified substances currently being used. Urine analysis, while capable of detecting the presence of more substances, has problems of practicality, accuracy, and speed. A urine analysis, as with other current techniques, also presents the problems of subjects objecting to providing samples.
Another problem with non-invasive breath analysis concerns accuracy. This method is considered inaccurate unless a number of tests are conducted over a period of time. The reason for this is that the recent consumption of alcohol, the occurance of gastric disturbances such as belching, or the use of alcohol containing mouth wash render the results inaccurate.
A still further disadvantage of current detection systems involves portability. Law enforcement officials generally need to determine the presence of substances in the fluids at the time of an offense. For example, in those of an operator of a motor vehicle. In order to obtain an accurate determination of the presence of various substances, the current practice is to transport the operator to a station house remote from the roadway where the operator was apprehended. The loss of time and inefficiency of such a procedure is readily apparent.
When alcohol or controlled substances are introduced into the human body and into the body's fluidic systems, they are also introduced into the vitreous humor of the eyeballs. Furthermore, the concentration of the substance in the vitreous humor is related to the concentration in the body itself. Thus, an examination of the vitreous humor can provide information on the presence and concentration of alcohol or controlled substances in the body.